I see quite often on this forum there is allegation that women are misusing the DV Act. To dispel such misconceptions, I reproduce some parts of the judgment in Varsha Kapoor Vs. Union of India.
Below are not my arguments, but the arguments of the advocate representing the mother-in-law in Varsha Kapoor Vs. Union of India case before the Division Bench. He himself avers that women are subjected to utmost cruelty.
" The learned counsel highlighted in this behalf that violence constitutes a major form and process of oppression of women. An understanding of gender reality over the years reveals how WP(Crl.) No.638 of 2010 Page 3 of 25 violence has always been used as a means to subjugate women and keep them in a position of subordination. Gender based violence may take many different forms and there may be distinctive patterns or manifestations of gender violence associated with particular communities, cultures or regions and historical epochs. Gender violence is present in all societies; it is a structural phenomenon embedded in the context of culture, socio-economic and emotional dependency, the property of some male protector. Societies organized around gendered, hierarchical power relation give legitimacy to violence against women. Violence against women, like all other historical manifestation of violence, is embedded in the socio-economic and political context of power relations. It is produced within class, caste and patriarchal social relations in which male power dominates. A narrow definition of violence may define it as an act of criminal use of physical force. But this is an incomplete definition. Violence also includes exploitation, discrimination, upholding of unequal economic and social structures, the creation of an atmosphere of terror, threat, or reprisal and forms of religio-culture."
In other parts of the judgement of this case, the court rejected the argument of the mother-in-law that DV Act is unconstitutional and proved how DV Act is not unconstitutional. That is for some other time.